Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 12, 2025
11:51
An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage
Published on: February 10, 2014
15.7K
Marginal Bone Loss around Implants with Internal Hexagonal and Internal Conical Connections: A 12-Month Randomized
Pablo Galindo-Moreno1,2, Ada Concha-Jeronimo3, Lucia Lopez-Chaichio3
1Department of Oral Surgery and Implant Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain.
Journal of Clinical Medicine
|November 27, 2021
Summary
Internal hexagonal implant connections show greater marginal bone loss compared to conical connections in single-unit restorations over 12 months. This finding highlights the importance of implant-prosthesis connection type for long-term dental implant success.
Area of Science:
- Dental Implantology
- Biomaterials Science
- Periodontology
Background:
- The implant-prosthesis connection is critical for biomechanical stability and peri-implant tissue health.
- Internal hexagonal and internal conical connections are common designs, each with potential advantages and disadvantages.
- Understanding their impact on marginal bone level (MBL) is essential for predictable long-term outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the marginal bone level (MBL) around dental implants with internal conical versus internal hexagonal implant-prosthesis connections.
- To evaluate MBL changes over a 12-month period following prosthesis delivery in single-unit restorations.
- To identify potential correlations between MBL and other clinical/radiographic factors.
Main Methods:
- A randomized clinical trial involving 30 patients requiring single implant-supported restorations.
- Implants featured either internal conical or internal hexagonal connections, with consistent macro- and microarchitecture.
- Clinical and radiographic data, including MBL, were collected at 3, 6, and 12 months post-prosthesis delivery.
Main Results:
- Significant differences in MBL were observed at 12 months between the conical (-0.25 ± 0.12 mm) and hexagonal (-0.70 ± 0.43 mm) groups (p=0.033).
- MBL changes from prosthesis delivery to 12 months were also significantly greater for hexagonal connections (-0.56 ± 0.44 mm) compared to conical (-0.15 ± 0.13 mm) (p=0.023).
- No significant correlations were found between MBL and adjacent teeth measurements, buccal bone levels, tissue thickness, or keratinized tissue.
Conclusions:
- Internal hexagonal implant-prosthesis connections are associated with significantly higher marginal bone loss compared to internal conical connections in single-unit restorations.
- The choice of implant-prosthesis connection type appears to influence peri-implant bone stability over a 12-month follow-up period.
- Further research may explore the long-term implications and underlying mechanisms of this observed difference in bone response.
